ame o ospit or nstitution not in ospit

Let’s say you wanted to create a fake birth certificate for Barack Obama. Would you put “ame o ospit or nstitution not in ospit” on one layer of the form and then create another layer with “N f h al i (If h al” and then try to line them up so that when printed they look perfect? Or would you make some text that said: “Name of hospital or institution (If not in hospital”? Following are the two layers from Obama’s long form showing this text on the layers:

If you believe the birther version of Obama long form forgery, you have to swallow exactly that Bizarro decomposition of the text by some hapless or clueless human forger, who despite his ineptitude creates a document that prints gorgeously and fooled several credentialed document examiners. I have years of experience with electronic conversion of documents and scanning text. That gobbledygook is exactly what I have seen over and over when computers try to deal with small text or bad copies of text. If you’ve ever played with OCR on difficult documents, you’ve probably seen the same thing.

Birthers don’t understand that the real world is messy. For them the world is highly ordered and messy things are the manifestations of the conspiracy behind it1. The inability to spot nonsense, such as the title to this article, is what makes a conspiracy theorist, and why their view of the world is so different from others.

1I am reminded here of the movie, The Matrix, where where the world of perception is really a massive computer program simulating the world and things that aren’t quite right are bugs in the program. In conspiracy thinking, things that aren’t quite right are mistakes made by conspirators who are running the world.

193 Responses to ame o ospit or nstitution not in ospit

> For them the world is highly ordered and messy things are the manifestations of the conspiracy behind it

I would’ve put “simple/complicated” instead of “ordered/messy”, but you have a point there by highlighting a different aspect of conspiracy thinking.

For conspiracy believers, the world is simple, thus any process must be simple as well, and being ordered is one symptom of that. As in “a stamp applied by an official always looks the same and cannot be smeared or uneven etc.”.

However, for birthers, that is not the core of their belief but simply the lenghts they will go to to defend their ODS. As in “the stamp is aligned perfectly, that’s impossible, FORGERY” and “the stamp is smeared, that’s impossible, FORGERY”. I don’t think most of them have ever applied such standards to other scenarios.

The Magic M: However, for birthers, that is not the core of their belief but simply the lenghts they will go to to defend their ODS. As in “the stamp is aligned perfectly, that’s impossible, FORGERY” and “the stamp is smeared, that’s impossible, FORGERY”. I don’t think most of them have ever applied such standards to other scenarios.

This is what I call a Say Anything Campaign. Every datum, every known fact is connected to the message of the Say Anything Campaign (what the loon wants to be true or convinces others of) by an assertion (a custom bit of spin, often spun on the fly).

In business, this is called advertising, and it’s regulated for reason conspiracy loons demonstrate nonstop.

The Magic M: I don’t think most of them have ever applied such standards to other scenarios.

If they are into other conspiracies, they absolutely have. This is a product of a way of thinking, a tendency or willingness to compulsively lie / distort to avoid admitting error or fessing up to lies / distortions.

I can’;t say I’ve come across a birther who was on all other subjects meticulously rational and honest.

“I am reminded here of the movie, The Matrix, where where the world of perception is really a massive computer program simulating the world and things that aren’t quite right are bugs in the program. In conspiracy thinking, things that aren’t quite right are mistakes made by conspirators who are running the world.”

Birthers often reference dystopic science fiction and conspiracy films (i.e., “The Matrix”). Although devoted authoritarians, birthers are drawn to movies in which a recalcitrant protagonist conquers authority by using special powers of observation or analysis to “connect the dots” and see a hidden truth. Inflamed by fantasy, birthers mimic the investigatory mindset of their fictional heroes, expecting reality to be as gonzo as the movies they adore. In a conspiracy movie, no plot twist is too absurd; for the birther, no allegation is too ridiculous and no “fact” ever needs checking.

Are the layers still an issue? Is it really so hard to live in a “messy” world where PDFs and layered digital images aren’t the same? Do birthers open spreadsheets in word processing applications to verify the formulas?

It comes from the Law of Conservation of Conspiracy, once created a conspiracy theory cannot be destroyed; it only may change in form. The exception is when the last adherent to the conspiracy and all their writings dies.

Dr. Conspiracy:
It comes from the Law of Conservation of Conspiracy, once created a conspiracy theory cannot be destroyed; it only may change in form. The exception is when the last adherent to the conspiracy and all their writings dies.

Dr. Conspiracy:
“I am reminded here of the movie, The Matrix, where where the world of perception is really a massive computer program simulating the world and things that aren’t quite right are bugs in the program.”

I was thinking about something along these lines yesterday after I saw Irey interviewed. Based on his theory, not only were words take from other documents to put together a jigsaw puzzle of a lfbc, but individual letters. This was his explanation for why letters appeared to be different sizes and fonts.

it struck me that such a creation would be painstakingly tedious and take forever to create. One has to wonder why someone who wanted to create a forgery wouldn’t simply take an old BC, print it, white out the typing, photocopy it and then type new words on an old typewrite so that the fonts would be uniform.

I raise this issue to show the dichotomy of the birther mind. They believe that Obama and his handlers were so conniving and devious that they forged a bc, stole a ss# and forged a selective service card, but were so stupid so as to do them in the worst possible way.

Why steal a SS# from someone in Connecticut? Why not simply take one from Hawaii? Why go about the hardest possible way to forge a lfbc when it seems so much simpler to do it the way I suggested?

Yoda: Why steal a SS# from someone in Connecticut? Why not simply take one from Hawaii? Why go about the hardest possible way to forge a lfbc when it seems so much simpler to do it the way I suggested?

That’s my take on the Selective Service registration. Since only microfilm copies of SSR card are available why go through the whole process of creating an actual ssr card? Why not just make a replica on a computer and use that to make a microfilm copy? Why bother to find a Honolulu PO stamp, cut a rubber date stamp up and still not get it right? The Cold Case Posse must think it’s the 1960’s

Great article Doc! You wrote:”Birthers don’t understand that the real world is messy. For them the world is highly ordered and messy things are the manifestations of the conspiracy behind it.”

As profoundly correct as your point is, it only addresses ‘half’ of the Birthers and ‘half’ of the continuum of ‘order’. There are at least two very different types of Birthers usually involved in Birther initiatives. They are generally and by several degrees, the ‘believer-Birthers’ (think Terry Lakin, and Orly Taitz) and the ‘deceiver-Birthers’ (think Klayman, Kerchner, and Apuzzo).

‘Believer-Birthers’ don’t understand that almost every aspect of the real world is upon closer and reasonably thorough examination, both messy and highly organized. Obama’s story to them, is both too messy AND too organized, to be taken at face value. They also assume that either characteristic is not just a manifestation of conspiracy, but that claiming it involves conspiracy, constitutes conclusive evidence proving that a chargeable crime has already been committed, and that another serious abetting crime will be committed by anyone in government knowingly not accordingly pursuing prosecution. Thus all non-cooperating members of Congress, the judiciary, and the Justice Department are going to end up in prison.

‘Deceiver-Birthers’ DO understand that almost every aspect of the real world is upon closer and reasonably thorough examination, both messy and highly organized. They assume that either characteristic is sufficient excuse for plausibly alleging a conspiracy, and feed their disingenuous work product to both the ‘Believer-Birthers’, Obama-hating partisan WEB sites, and even to the mainstream media, hoping for a bite from low-information writers or readers.

Yes, ‘Believer-Birthers’ are unable to spot nonsensical anti-Obama premises easily, or at all. But ‘Deceiver-Birthers’ like Apuzzo, who presumably pride themselves in not being able to be deceived by the shallow reasoning of their own Obama-bashing accusations, are exquisitely adept at generating intellectually vacuous legal opinions which they know will garner instant whole-hearted support from the ‘believer-Birthers’, who then treat such opinions as though those opinions are the highest law of the land, with their immediate application to dumping Obama, even trumping assorted uncontroversial other Constitutional rights, like innocence until guilt is proven in a court of law, for example.

You show, through civility alone here, more respect for the ‘believer-Birthers’ than the ‘deceiver-Birthers’ have for them, since the latter have no respect for the former, who they rile up with misinformation. The legal profession should be proud of how few of its members have participated in this farcical abuse of the courts.

And we should all be proud of our judiciary, which has patiently demonstrated throughout this extended circus of trying events, that every appeal to justice gets AT LEAST close enough to be heard and rewarded if it has any basis in fact and law. As the saying (paraphrasing) goes, “Liberty in a great nation is significantly measured by how it deals with its most eccentric citizens.”

I remember back in college I had an “aha” moment in an applied mathematics course when it occurred to me that everything in the real physical world is described by partial differential equations. They are very simple in form but finding the solutions can be incredibly difficult and take up pages of calculus. That has nothing to do with birth certificates but I mention it just to show Doc is correct and that stuff is messy in the real world.

I read a book once about math and physics that posited the theory that the mathematics behind physics is the only true reality and that our world is somewhat like a hologram of the mathematics. I am sure I am over simplifying the theory but it was along those lines. i enjoy reading books about physics, mathematics, consciousness, and reality. That was until I got distracted by the damn Birthers four years ago.

Dr. Conspiracy: the Law of Conservation of Conspiracy, once created a conspiracy theory cannot be destroyed; it only may change in form. The exception is when the last adherent to the conspiracy and all their writings dies.

I got an email just yesterday that used the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion as evidence of the evil Jewish conspiracy.

Reality Check: I remember back in college I had an “aha” moment in an applied mathematics course when it occurred to me that everything in the real physical world is described by partial differential equations.

John Woodman makes this same point emphatically in his book that no forger would ever go about intentionally creating a file with the layers seen in the LFBC pdf, no way. However, the separation does makes sense when you understand how MRC works. nbc also did some excellent work on deconstructing the pdf in comment exchanges Guenter. I hope nbc starts blogging again soon.

“Let’s say you wanted to create a fake birth certificate for Barack Obama. Would you put “ame o ospit or nstitution not in ospit” on one layer of the form and then create another layer with “N f h al i (If h al” and then try to line them up so that when printed they look perfect?”

No, I would not, but an image segmentation algorithm relying on edge detection techniques would (quick! what is different about letters selected for the new layer and those left behind?).

So, if I didn’t do it, but an algorithm did … what would a subroutine stand to gain by cutting up a President’s birth certificate? Fame? Fortune? An upgrade to server-side to cutdown on commute time? Acess to the portal, a chance to become a user?

Hell, that lazy algorithm didn’t even bother to change any of the words. What was the point of all that effort, algorithm? You’a messup’a my image but don’t actually do anything??? You’re fired!

I know, and there are lots of goofy things in the LFBC when you try to look it as a human-constructed fake. I just wanted to make one of those short obvious to anyone articles because because of my exchange with Orly, some of her readers are visiting here (I’ve been getting emails).

Reality Check: John Woodman makes this same point emphatically in his book that no forger would ever go about intentionally creating a file with the layers seen in the LFBC pdf, no way.

Dr. Conspiracy: I know, and there are lots of goofy things in the LFBC when you try to look it as a human-constructed fake.

Another thing I’ve wondered: Why don’t birthers simply claim the forgery was created using (partially) automated computer software? As in “they scanned 10 birth certificates and told the computer what they expected as result”?
My theory is that this would – at least in their twisted world – contradict the “Obama did it” meme. After all, they fear that if the PDF were officially found to be a forgery, Obama could just say “I had nothing to do with it”.
If birthers conjectured the alleged forger used some super-advanced FBI forgery software, that would exclude Obama from the suspect list as he would not have access to such software in his normal course of business.

And if you were Mr. C’s virtual scanner machine equipped with his imaginary MRC compression algorithm, would you place Onaka’s date stamp in one layer and his signature stamp in another layer so that they can later be separately selected and moved entirely off the certificate?

And would you add two other bizzaro objects which consist of nothing but random clumps of pure white pixels?

And would you break up a perfectly clean xerox copy image into nine separate layers including one background layer with scattered bits of text and form lines and eight other layers including six text layers and the two white spot layers just to reduce the file size of the PDF image file when the White House is on an unlimited budget?

And would your magic bullet MRC compression thingy set the rectangular object boundaries of the eight objects (of eight different layers) such that at most three sides always pass through the outer edge of at least one outermost pixel of one or more text characters but the other side does not?

And would you choose the background layer to be an 8 Bit color layer with Grayscale, anti-aliased text and the all text layers to be 1 Bit monochrome binary, aliased text with a monochrome color that is non-black and different for each layer but each color is uniform over each text layer in both the character and transparent regions and the same for the white spot layers?

And would you not flatten this image before posting it on the White House web site for the world to see and thereby causing a deluge of ridicule to fall on the undeserving American citizens who are paying the freight for all of this folly.

And finally would you then tell the world that there is nothing untoward about this image because it is business as usual at the White House and the President doesn’t have time to bother with his identity?

So you’re a crank and an expert pretender. Your expertise is so lacking that you lack even the ability to realize your own ineptitude.

Hermitian: And would you add two other bizzaro objects which consist of nothing but random clumps of pure white pixels?

And would you break up a perfectly clean xerox copy image into nine separate layers including one background layer with scattered bits of text and form lines and eight other layers including six text layers and the two white spot layers just to reduce the file size of the PDF image file when the White House is on an unlimited budget?

“imaginary”? MRC compression. Wow. Several of the large corporations and research groups have been filing reports and patents related to the technique for 16 years, all the way back to the “internet fax project” (a need the PDF file format itself wound up filling). And now it’s common as dirt in image processing software, often literally going by the name “MRC” in options menus. The extremely literally named concept—M ixed R aster C ontent, literally explains itself.

Google really doesn’t work for you, does it?

Your post indicates this article fell right over your head. Its a point I’ve been beating you over the head with for 18 months now. Why are the obects in the separated as they are? An algorithm with only 3 parameters will yield the results seen in the WH LFBC. It shouldn’t to a genius to divine them. What are they? Once you’ve deduced them, go looking for a model that employs those parameters.

You’re asked why would a human process an image in this manner, and your brilliant response is to ask why would a human process an image in this manner.

Great! We agree. A human didn’t do it. What, other than humans, handles the processing of digital files?

And would you break up a perfectly clean xerox copy image into nine separate layers including one background layer with scattered bits of text and form lines and eight other layers including six text layers and the two white spot layers just to reduce the file size of the PDF image file when the White House is on an unlimited budget?

An awful lot of time, money, and expertise was expended developing the capability to do just that. Maintaining legibility in a document while compressing it 98+% is no easy task.

Here we see again, sufficiently advanced technology regarded by the (willfully) ignorant as magic. 😛

Thanks for your condolences. I expected nothing else for to allow us to be heard would be to allow a crack in the wall of judicial tyranny.

I will see these cases I have pending through to their conclusions, though the results are pre-ordained I am sure. After that, I think we might take a cue from the Abolitionists and gather together for a meeting of the minds . . .

Surely you don’t mean your 1961 Federal coding manual which applied only to the race of the child and not to the parents? The one that was never used by the states to code the race of the parents. I thoroughly debunked that on your site last year.

Why did the “R” in BARACK in the child’s name stay with the background layer and is at the same resolution as the background layer but the “R” in BARACK the father’s name stay with one of the text layers and is at the higher resolution?

In fact, why did the forger use different “R”s after he created the name BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA the first time?

Why in MRC does the background layer get compressed using a lossy compression algorithm while the text masks (layers) are compressed using a lossless compression algorithm? Wouldn’t this result in layers that are at different resolutions?

Since you are incapable of using the quote feature or of providing context, I don’t know what you’re talking about without more trouble than you merit.

Perhaps you are confused though. It was Mike Zullo who claimed he had a 1961 federal coding manual used by Hawaii for coding the race of the parents. He has been debunked by me. I have an article on it. I have had the federal file layout for 1961 for ages, indicating that the race of the parents was not part of the 1961 federal data set.

At one point, I thought the State of Hawaii might have used the Federal Child’s race code for the parents’ race for their own purposes, but this was ruled out through research into other certificates. Hawaii used their own codes.

I do not recall any contribution from you on this web site on that topic.

Hermitian: Surely you don’t mean your 1961 Federal coding manual which applied only to the race of the child and not to the parents? The one that was never used by the states to code the race of the parents. I thoroughly debunked that on your site last year.

“Great! We agree. A human didn’t do it. What, other than humans, handles the processing of digital files?”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I duuno man cuz I don’t recognize your handle. You must have been posting under different handles at different sites. I never do that.

So you are claiming that the White House copied one of the two certified paper copies on a state-of-the-art Xerox Work Center equipped with MRC compression?

And then they loaded this multilayer PDF image onto a Apple computer and used Apple Preview to create a new PDF image file. And the reason that the WH did this was to erase all METADATA that would reveal that they had used a state-of-the art Xerox machine to copy the certified copy. And then they refused to release the certified copy which Obama had purchased at a price of $7.00 per copy.

Sure! When pigs can fly.

No! The WH LFCOLB is a forgery created by a HUMAN forger.

And I suspect that Mr. C. does not have a high opinion of this forger’s work because he knows that his “reconstructed” Obama LFCOLB was better quality than the WH LFCOLB but it wasn’t picked.

“Wheeeee! And a-whizzing away off-topic we go. (Yes, I am a part-time hypocrite; however Herms is notorious for whiplash-inducing non-sequiturs when he is stumped.)”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You obviously didn’t try Mr. C’s link over to Woodman’s site did you Aes? It figures — Just another lazy Obot.

Just wondering why all you Obots are suddenly back to defending the WH LFCOLB when you should be defending the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image. That’s the one where all of the forger’s defects in The WH LFCOLB PDF image have been eliminated.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

gorefan: Wouldn’t this result in layers that are at different resolutions?

No. Lossy v. lossless doesn’t result in differing resolutions. The whole point of the name (Mixed Raster …) is to determine what detail needs to be preserved at the original resolution, and what can be reduced (usually cut in half) in order to greatly reduce file size. Generally, letterforms and symbols are selected, and then, one at a time by approximate color, rendered into a new bitmap object, one for each approximate color. Widely separated object of the same color are often rendered as separate, much smaller objects. Then, the resolution of the remaining overall image is lowered, and the result is then compressed, usually favoring file size over quality (i.e., very lossy image).

The whole point is to reproduce the image at two different resolution. Low-res full-color (or full greyscale), and high-res monochrome.

The HDOH produced two certified copies of Obama’s original long-form hospital generated birth certificate.

They did so by placing the Orange-backed bound volume containing the original paper certificate face down onto the glass of their basic Xerox machine and making two copies onto heavy weight Green basket-weave security paper. However they did not copy the reverse side of the original certificate.

The White House then placed one of the two certified copies face down onto the glass of their state-of-the-art Xerox Work Center equipped with the latest MRC compression software.

They then selected the best MRC option and made a copy while writing the compressed PDF file to disk.

The WH staff then loaded the PDF image file onto an Apple computer and produced yet another PDF file which erased all the METADATA revealing that the copy had been initially produced by the Xerox Work Center.

And then four days ago Mr. C informed the world that the WH LFCOLB PDF image is not a duplicate copy of the certified copy and therefore has no evidentiary value.

Hermitian: And if you were Mr. C’s virtual scanner machine equipped with his imaginary MRC compression algorithm, would you place Onaka’s date stamp in one layer and his signature stamp in another layer so that they can later be separately selected and moved entirely off the certificate?

Have you tried this? Have you actually moved the date stamp entirely off the certificate? Have you noticed what gets left behind in that location?

Have you removed all the “layers” and seen what remains behind? Hint: “A pristine safety paper image” is incorrect.

Hermitian: And then they loaded this multilayer PDF image onto a Apple computer and used Apple Preview to create a new PDF image file. And the reason that the WH did this was to erase all METADATA that would reveal that they had used a state-of-the art Xerox machine to copy the certified copy.

Again:

Apple Preview is automatically triggered when you open a mail attachment on a Mac.

Apple Preview automatically creates a new PDF image when it opens a PDF file.

The reason the WH did this is it is the default and expected behavior of the workflow. They would have had to have done unusual things for this not to happen.

“State-of-the-art Xerox machine” means “the kind of Xerox machine a decently run office would be expected to lease.” You make it sound like “Spooky Mission: Impossible forgery machine.” Why?

Hermitian: I duuno man cuz I don’t recognize your handle. You must have been posting under different handles at different sites.

I have two. Thjs one is very old, in use since 1998. You have seen me here and at Amazon as variations of ‘JPotter’. Unless dealing in information not easily verifiable, or trying to create/promote a brand, identities are of little consequence online IMO. This is the realm of ideas. ‘What’ is far more important than ‘who’.

I doubt that very much, but won’t ask you to prove a negative. I also note you are posting here under an alias. You don’t sign your other correspondence as ‘Hermitian’

Hermitian: So you are claiming that the White House copied one of the two certified paper copies on a state-of-the-art Xerox Work Center equipped with MRC compression?

Yes. From my experience it is as obvious as the weather. But, of course, not everyone has my experience. So, to you, unless you trust my experience enough to override your bias, it is merely a claim, requiring proof. In my experience with you, you allow nothing to override your bias, as you will admit no err or shortcoming. You won’t even take advantage of this or other forums basic features for fear others will belittle you as unsophisticated … much less concede an obvious truth you have been denying.

An Apple computer, really? Well, at least you didn’t call it ‘the’ computer.

No. Have you any work experience in a modern office? Dedicated flatbed scanners are relegated to specialists (photographers, archivists, etc). Nowadays, the general office populace uses one MFD (multifunction device), like a Xerox WorkCentre, for printing, copying, collating, binding, scanning, and faxing. These wonderful devices are even networked. A staffer placed the file on the Xerox’s bed or in the feeder, selected a scanning option suitable for web display, selected their email, and hit the go button. They checked their email, opened the attachment, which popped up in their default PDF reader. On a Mac, that’s Preview. They looked it over for legibility, then saved it to a web server. The webmaster then linked that file location to the web page announcing the release of Obama’s LFBC.

Very simple workflow, happens millions of times everyday all around the world.

How do I know it’s a Xerox? Here at my office, we have a crummy old Toshiba. Several of our clients use Xerox. The PDFs they send me on a daily basis are, from a structure and image quality standpoint, twins of the WH LFBC.

And lest I forget yet again as you keep bringing all this stuff up and dragging us all into the minutiae: it does not matter. All the BC images have the same data. It is the data that matters. The data has been certified multiple times over by the only organization empowered to certify it.

Just wondering: has anyone with way too much free time on their hands tried to actually manually create something that would resemble the “layers” and the background image?

Since this is what Team Birfer is accusing Team Conspiracy of doing, I think they should give it a shot and do a video, to show how crazy easy it would be for that to happen. I want to see something as hilarious totally definitive as the Hand Crafted Artisan Makiki Stamper Video.

No fair cheating and using wizard tools like this mythical “MRC” we all know doesn’t really exist.

My thinking on the codes, and how I developed theories, and tested them, is clear on the site here.

Having over 30 years dealing with medical and vital records coding systems, I know that usually the same code system is used for every instance of the thing being coded. That is, the same race code table is used for anybody and everybody’s race: child or parent.

And there’s no evidence that any organization used different code sets for race in the same year.

It took some time to figure out that Hawaii wasn’t using the federal coding system, but when this was proven, I reported it.

Hermitian has nothing to do with anything I did or said.

aesthetocyst: He rambled on about it at Amazon forever. It was after he was banned here. He lurked here and ‘responded’ to your coding manual articles at Amazon.

And this said by someone who doesn’t know the difference between a scanned PDF and one from a word processing program. Notice how Hermitian, for all his commenting, went silent about this when I told him to ZOOM IN.

ROFL

Hermitian: Just wondering why all you Obots are suddenly back to defending the WH LFCOLB when you should be defending the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image. That’s the one where all of the forger’s defects in The WH LFCOLB PDF image have been eliminated.

Dr. Conspiracy: OK. I don’t usually read the Amazon thread, so I wouldn’t know.

Hasn’t been a point in doing so in a long time. All that’s left is the occasional guilty pleasure. Tracy Fair has been on a completely, and uninformative tear over there.

Dr. Conspiracy: the difference between a scanned PDF and one from a word processing program.

Vector vs. raster. A distinction completely lost on noobs in this advanced age. Back in the 90s it was more obvious.

Hermitian: Just wondering why all you Obots are suddenly back to defending the WH LFCOLB when you should be defending the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image. That’s the one where all of the forger’s defects in The WH LFCOLB PDF image have been eliminated.

He does work so hard at giving the appearance of being in charge. To the point of becoming completely nonsensical. Can you imagine Herms on the stand? Only in my wildest dreams. He is well aware of his flaws, but won’t admit them here. He confides in others. 😉

Hermitian: Just wondering why all you Obots are suddenly back to defending the WH LFCOLB when you should be defending the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image.

I asked you this before: what is the difference between the particulars of Obama’s birth listed on the WH LFCOLB and those listed on the Tepper 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image?

If Tepper, instead of providing a PDF image, instead included a typed list of the particulars of Obama’s birth as given on the WH LFCOLB, would that list have then been a “forgery” ? If Onaka had certified that the information on that list was the same as the information on the original LFCOLB in the HI DoH vault, would there have been some crime committed?

I thought somebody said Doc has to unlock the page or something. I’ve been coming to this page since I got my iPad and this just started happening maybe a couple weeks ago. Then all of a sudden last week, it started working fine….I could pinch/enlarge, etc., then this week, it’s back…….so I’ve just been reading the blog at work cause I can’t bear the eye strain on the iPad and am too lazy to sit at my desk top at home.

Prepare for the worst now that you “useful idiots” have aided a fraud to be your leader. Your guns are on the way out… so some fraud aiders believe. Your taxes are going up, and you also will now have a shorter life created by the ‘BOGUS IN CHIEF’. The death panels were allocated about 3 billion to figure out how to terminate your sorry butts in your senior years.

Older American citizens were wise with their decision making processes. When the older American citizens fought for their share of the pie, they looked to when they would be the most vulnerable and planned for those OLD age years. Now those who aided the fraud will pay dearly for their current actions in choosing a fraud that will change everything that the most senior benefits fighters negotiated to care for their children and themselves during their most vulnerable years.

Now to this Tepper critter. Why would someone attempt to con a court by making believe that they extended themselves to aid the court? The answer to the question is that the critter tried to fool the court, didn’t he? The court is incapable of ordering new copies of a BC, is that the view of the critter? The attorney that provided the first BC to the court couldn’t be requested to provide a better reproduction for the court’s review?

C’mon the Tepper critter got nailed for his attempt to defraud the court, didn’t he ? Why wouldn’t anyone conclude that the critter attempted to alter a document provided to the court? AH! yes… the fraud in the White House did the same thing more than once, dind’t he?

You “fraud aiders”, that put a bum in the White House will learn about your inability to comprehend when you are aiding your demise as a “FREE” person by surrendering your rights to have a suspect tried for FRAUD.

jayHG: I thought somebody said Doc has to unlock the page or something.I’ve been coming to this page since I got my iPad and this just started happening maybe a couple weeks ago.Then all of a sudden last week, it started working fine….I could pinch/enlarge, etc., then this week, it’s back…….so I’ve just been reading the blog at work cause I can’t bear the eye strain on the iPad and am too lazy to sit at my desk top at home.

Inexplicably, the Mobile Theme option will get switched to ON and then it seems that you have no control over the size of the text. You can’t pinch/enlarge, whatever. Today my Google Nexus 7″ tablet got stuck that way. I keep telling it to switch the Mobile Theme OFF, but it doesn’t obey. So I’m stuck with however WordPress wants to display things. I’ve had that problem with my iPod Touch in the past, then suddenly it will decide to turn off the Mobile Theme. I don’t follow the rhyme or reason. It just happens.

YOU-DID-IT:
Prepare for the worst now that you “useful idiots” have aided a fraud to be your leader.Your guns are on the way out… so some fraud aiders believe.Your taxes are going up, and you also will now have a shorter life created by the ‘BOGUS IN CHIEF’.The death panels were allocated about 3 billion to figure out how to terminate your sorry butts in your senior years.

–snip– More of the same ranting…

Doc – I must say, I just love the comedy relief that randomly appears at your site.

Scientist: Hermy: Let’s pretend that the LFBC is a forgery, but with 100% accurate information in every box. Now explain why anyone should care.

And while you’re at it Hermy, let’s pretend that Orly’s dental chair is a forgery, but with 100% accurate adjustability in every reclining configuration. Now explain why an Orly-smitten Charles Lincoln III should care?

Seriously, Scientist – your point is the all-consuming black hole of all these specious Birther claims of “forgery”!

Oh, You-Idiot, you guys said that four years ago. Sky-high inflation is coming!! And $9/gallon gas! And FEMA camps! Economic failure! And skyrocketing unemployment! Gays serving will cause 50% of the military to quit! And all guns will be confiscated! Sharia law will be imposed any day now! Obama’s so cozy with terrorists, there’ll be catastrophic attacks every month! The stock market will tank! There will be jail time for mentioning Jesus! A tidal wave of illegal immigrants will mean no jobs for white folks! The energy industry will be crushed! After bailing out Detroit it will fail anyway! Mandatory abortions! America will be a Socialist Hell Hole any day now…

Holy Hound’s Teeth, dude, nobody’s buying that swill.

Face it: you guys are now the Boy Who Cried “Usurper!” and nobody’s going to listen.

I especially love these massive FEMA death camps. Surely some upstanding patriot lives near one and would tell everybody where it is and what’s supposedly going on… and all these disappearing grandparents! You’da thunk Billy Bob and Jodene would have noticed Great Aunt Myrtle’s vanished, and at least tried to claim their inheritances.

“John Woodman makes this same point emphatically in his book that no forger would ever go about intentionally creating a file with the layers seen in the LFBC pdf, no way. However, the separation does makes sense when you understand how MRC works. nbc also did some excellent work on deconstructing the pdf in comment exchanges Guenter. I hope nbc starts blogging again soon.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You must mean the “late” John Woodman. He’s the one with that graveyard blog site because his book didn’t sale. Yes I remember John. I guess GS pulled his ticket. Wonder what he did wrong?

When are you Obots going to get off you butts and reconstruct the WH LFCOLB using your state-of-the-art Xerox Work Center equipped with the MRC thingy?

Gosh! We just learned that Mr. C. “reconstructed” the Obama LFCOLB in Aug 2009 nearly two years before HDOH created the two certified copies for Obama. You would think that after all his effort to create his “reconstruction”, Mr. C. by now would have run his prize through that magic Xerox scanner to show the world exactly how the WH LFCOLB was created.

But then what if he already has and it didn’t work out? Maybe RC the Radio Head could invite him on his show and ask him all about it?

The mobile theme is configured to allow resizing of text (this change was made over a month ago). On my iPhone with the mobile theme, I can resize the text with the pinch gesture.

Just to be clear, there are three presentations of the blog.

The mobile theme which which shows snips of each article on the home page with a “Read This Post” link. You should be able to resize this.

The second is the adaptive presentation. This happens when the width of the screen is low, but it is not one of the supported mobile devices.You can see this in Windows by just resizing your window. When this happens, you’ll see the menus go away, replaced by the word “Navigation” and a button. The sidebars are reposition to the bottom of the screen. I don’t think you can resize this one; I can’t on my Kindle.

The third is the normal presentation that has all the menus.

I used to have problems switching the mobile theme off and on, but with the latest software revisions I put on a few months back, I haven’t had the problem, that was due to issues with caching of the mobile theme.

OK, I found and have added another configuration option that might have some effect on the mobile theme. Refresh and try it again. This may affect the ability to switch between mobile and standard and also deals with the “Nonce failure” error message.

MN-Skeptic: Inexplicably, the Mobile Theme option will get switched to ON and then it seems that you have no control over the size of the text.

Craig: Surely some upstanding patriot lives near one and would tell everybody where it is and what’s supposedly going on…

Oh, but they do! Search for “800 FEMA camps” or some such. They have lists, capacities, dates of operation, etc. Of course, all(?) of the sites seem to be military bases (how convenient!). Yet no active military seems to be alerting the public … all of our serving men and women are dupes?
Thinking that is an odd way of supporting the troops.

“gorefan: Wouldn’t this result in layers that are at different resolutions?

“No. Lossy v. lossless doesn’t result in differing resolutions. The whole point of the name (Mixed Raster …) is to determine what detail needs to be preserved at the original resolution, and what can be reduced (usually cut in half) in order to greatly reduce file size. Generally, letterforms and symbols are selected, and then, one at a time by approximate color, rendered into a new bitmap object, one for each approximate color. Widely separated object of the same color are often rendered as separate, much smaller objects. Then, the resolution of the remaining overall image is lowered, and the result is then compressed, usually favoring file size over quality (i.e., very lossy image).

“The whole point is to reproduce the image at two different resolution. Low-res full-color (or full greyscale), and high-res monochrome.

“(gorefan: if that was a rhetorical for herms, I apologize)”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Words but zero action. No one (except a mindless Obot) is ever going to believe your MRC claim until you have run the necessary trials to “reconstruct” the WH LFCOLB. Mr. C. has the perfect JPEG original for your trials. And his Obama LFCOLB has a much better SAD signature than the one on the WH forgery.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“John Woodman makes this same point emphatically in his book that no forger would ever go about intentionally creating a file with the layers seen in the LFBC pdf, no way. However, the separation does makes sense when you understand how MRC works. nbc also did some excellent work on deconstructing the pdf in comment exchanges Guenter. I hope nbc starts blogging again soon.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You must mean the “late” John Woodman.He’s the one with that graveyard blog site because his book didn’t sale.Yes I remember John.I guess GS pulled his ticket.Wonder what he did wrong?

When are you Obots going to get off you butts and reconstruct the WH LFCOLB using your state-of-the-artXerox Work Center equipped with the MRC thingy?

Gosh!We just learned that Mr. C. “reconstructed” the Obama LFCOLB in Aug 2009 nearly two years before HDOH created the two certified copies for Obama.You would think that after all his effort to create his “reconstruction”, Mr. C. by now would have run his prize through that magic Xerox scanner to show the world exactly how the WH LFCOLB was created.

But then what if he already has and it didn’t work out?Maybe RC the Radio Head could invite him on his show and ask him all about it?

Hermitian:
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You must mean the “late” John Woodman.He’s the one with that graveyard blog site because his book didn’t sale.Yes I remember John.I guess GS pulled his ticket.Wonder what he did wrong?

What did he do wrong? I guess you could say he debunked your theories too early, Henry. He didn’t need to wait until you came around with your affidavit to prove your theories wrong. Amazing how far behind you are, isn’t it?

Hermitian:
When are you Obots going to get off you butts and reconstruct the WH LFCOLB using your state-of-the-artXerox Work Center equipped with the MRC thingy?

Don’t even need a copier with MRC. You just need to scan a photocopy. Computers can do the MRC for you. But you already know that, don’t you?

Hermitian:
Gosh!We just learned that Mr. C. “reconstructed” the Obama LFCOLB in Aug 2009 nearly two years before HDOH created the two certified copies for Obama.You would think that after all his effort to create his “reconstruction”, Mr. C. by now would have run his prize through that magic Xerox scanner to show the world exactly how the WH LFCOLB was created.

No need to reconstruct the document. We know how it was created: Hawaii told us in the letter sent to President Obama.

“Hermitian: And then they loaded this multilayer PDF image onto a Apple computer and used Apple Preview to create a new PDF image file. And the reason that the WH did this was to erase all METADATA that would reveal that they had used a state-of-the art Xerox machine to copy the certified copy.

“Again:

Apple Preview is automatically triggered when you open a mail attachment on a Mac.

Apple Preview automatically creates a new PDF image when it opens a PDF file.

The reason the WH did this is it is the default and expected behavior of the workflow. They would have had to have done unusual things for this not to happen.

“State-of-the-art Xerox machine” means “the kind of Xerox machine a decently run office would be expected to lease.” You make it sound like “Spooky Mission: Impossible forgery machine.” Why?

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You lazy Obots have zero credibility because you are all talk and no show.

Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

But you got nothing !

And the METADATA of the WH LFCOLB image file was scrubbed.

So what do you say to the judge when he asks why you only did this magic trick once?

And then you turned around and created a new different LFCOLB PDF image without using the same magic trick.

“gorefan: Wouldn’t this result in layers that are at different resolutions?

“No. Lossy v. lossless doesn’t result in differing resolutions. The whole point of the name (Mixed Raster …) is to determine what detail needs to be preserved at the original resolution, and what can be reduced (usually cut in half) in order to greatly reduce file size. Generally, letterforms and symbols are selected, and then, one at a time by approximate color, rendered into a new bitmap object, one for each approximate color. Widely separated object of the same color are often rendered as separate, much smaller objects. Then, the resolution of the remaining overall image is lowered, and the result is then compressed, usually favoring file size over quality (i.e., very lossy image).

“The whole point is to reproduce the image at two different resolution. Low-res full-color (or full greyscale), and high-res monochrome.

“(gorefan: if that was a rhetorical for herms, I apologize)”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Words but zero action.No one (except a mindless Obot) is ever going to believe your MRC claim until you have run the necessary trials to “reconstruct” the WH LFCOLB.Mr. C. has the perfect JPEG original for your trials. And his Obama LFCOLB has a much better SAD signature than the one on the WH forgery.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Why should anyone have to do your song and dance Henry when you claimed for months on amazon you had absolute proof that the long form was either delayed, late or altered and when asked to present proof you never did. You instead tried to claim the proper people have already been shown this “proof”. You’re a has been blake.

“Hermitian: I duuno man cuz I don’t recognize your handle. You must have been posting under different handles at different sites.

“I have two. Thjs one is very old, in use since 1998. You have seen me here and at Amazon as variations of ‘JPotter’. Unless dealing in information not easily verifiable, or trying to create/promote a brand, identities are of little consequence online IMO. This is the realm of ideas. ‘What’ is far more important than ‘who’.

“Hermitian: I never do that.

“I doubt that very much, but won’t ask you to prove a negative. I also note you are posting here under an alias. You don’t sign your other correspondence as ‘Hermitian’

“Hermitian: So you are claiming that the White House copied one of the two certified paper copies on a state-of-the-art Xerox Work Center equipped with MRC compression?

“Yes. From my experience it is as obvious as the weather. But, of course, not everyone has my experience. So, to you, unless you trust my experience enough to override your bias, it is merely a claim, requiring proof. In my experience with you, you allow nothing to override your bias, as you will admit no err or shortcoming. You won’t even take advantage of this or other forums basic features for fear others will belittle you as unsophisticated … much less concede an obvious truth you have been denying.

“No. Have you any work experience in a modern office? Dedicated flatbed scanners are relegated to specialists (photographers, archivists, etc). Nowadays, the general office populace uses one MFD (multifunction device), like a Xerox WorkCentre, for printing, copying, collating, binding, scanning, and faxing. These wonderful devices are even networked. A staffer placed the file on the Xerox’s bed or in the feeder, selected a scanning option suitable for web display, selected their email, and hit the go button. They checked their email, opened the attachment, which popped up in their default PDF reader. On a Mac, that’s Preview. They looked it over for legibility, then saved it to a web server. The webmaster then linked that file location to the web page announcing the release of Obama’s LFBC.

“Very simple workflow, happens millions of times everyday all around the world.

“How do I know it’s a Xerox? Here at my office, we have a crummy old Toshiba. Several of our clients use Xerox. The PDFs they send me on a daily basis are, from a structure and image quality standpoint, twins of the WH LFBC.

“Hermitian: Sure! When pigs can fly.

“Hey, I forgot that one! Diamonds, home runs, and pigs. Check.

“Hermitian: No! The WH LFCOLB is a forgery created by a HUMAN forger.

“Oh dear. The Henry Unit has rebooted (again!). There went this thread.

“Hermitian: Mr. C. does not have a high opinion of this forger’s work because he knows that his “reconstructed” Obama LFCOLB was better quality than the WH LFCOLB but it wasn’t picked.

“Now that is HHHHigh-larious! But no consideration given to my version? You’re a cruel man, Herms.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
No just a very experienced and educated Engineer who has worked with your kind for many years. Suffice it to say that if you showed up once to my design review with nothing but your blather then it would be your last.

Now that you have Mr. C’s really clear “reconstruction” of the Obama LFCOLB (already a JPEG) why don’t you print out a copy on your Toshiba multifunction and then do your magic PDF compression. And then post the PDF image file on this blog.

I would really like to see those Onaka stamps move around. And if it had those two separate white spot clusters I might get interested.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“My thinking on the codes, and how I developed theories, and tested them, is clear on the site here.

“Having over 30 years dealing with medical and vital records coding systems, I know that usually the same code system is used for every instance of the thing being coded. That is, the same race code table is used for anybody and everybody’s race: child or parent.

“And there’s no evidence that any organization used different code sets for race in the same year.

“It took some time to figure out that Hawaii wasn’t using the federal coding system, but when this was proven, I reported it.

“Hermitian has nothing to do with anything I did or said.

“aesthetocyst: He rambled on about it at Amazon forever. It was after he was banned here. He lurked here and ‘responded’ to your coding manual articles at Amazon.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Sorry! I didn’t see your update on the codes.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“And this said by someone who doesn’t know the difference between a scanned PDF and one from a word processing program. Notice how Hermitian, for all his commenting, went silent about this when I told him to ZOOM IN.”

“ROFL

“Hermitian: Just wondering why all you Obots are suddenly back to defending the WH LFCOLB when you should be defending the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image. That’s the one where all of the forger’s defects in The WH LFCOLB PDF image have been eliminated.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
That’s because you wanted me to zoom in on page 1. When you finally get around to page 4 wake me up.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“And this said by someone who doesn’t know the difference between a scanned PDF and one from a word processing program. Notice how Hermitian, for all his commenting, went silent about this when I told him to ZOOM IN.”

“ROFL

“Hermitian: Just wondering why all you Obots are suddenly back to defending the WH LFCOLB when you should be defending the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image. That’s the one where all of the forger’s defects in The WH LFCOLB PDF image have been eliminated.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
That’s because you wanted me to zoom in on page 1.When you finally get around to page 4 wake me up.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

So you’re not going to do any work yourself Henry but you want everyone to go through hoops reconfirming what the state of Hawaii has already confirmed? Okay Henry I got one for you how about you go about testing your theories on how you think Breitbart died and show us how it works through your recreations.

Hermitian: You lazy Obots have zero credibility because you are all talk and no show.

Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

But you got nothing !

And the METADATA of the WH LFCOLB image file was scrubbed.

So what do you say to the judge when he asks why you only did this magic trick once?

And then you turned around and created a new different LFCOLB PDF image without using the same magic trick.

We would have to have the certified copies provided by Hawaii to get the same nine layers. And the same scanner. And the same computer and program used for PDF conversion. Being such a marvel of Engineering, Henry, why don’t you tell us all what the equipment was?

Oh, you don’t know exactly what it was either…hmmm…

You, being an engineer, Mr. Blake, must know that we couldn’t get the EXACT result from something that is different. No “reconstruction” is going to be exactly the same. While it would be “close enough” for us humans, a computer algorithm will treat it differently because it is different.

Hermitian:
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
That’s because you wanted me to zoom in on page 1.When you finally get around to page 4 wake me up.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

That’s because even even page one will demonstrate that it’s a scan. Page 4 would suffice, too, but you’re too afraid to admit you’re wrong. It must be sad to be so shattered by us obots. I feel sorry for you, Henry.

“Dr. Conspiracy: OK. I don’t usually read the Amazon thread, so I wouldn’t know.

“Hasn’t been a point in doing so in a long time. All that’s left is the occasional guilty pleasure. Tracy Fair has been on a completely, and uninformative tear over there.

“Dr. Conspiracy: the difference between a scanned PDF and one from a word processing program.

“Vector vs. raster. A distinction completely lost on noobs in this advanced age. Back in the 90s it was more obvious.

“Hermitian: Just wondering why all you Obots are suddenly back to defending the WH LFCOLB when you should be defending the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image. That’s the one where all of the forger’s defects in The WH LFCOLB PDF image have been eliminated.

“He does work so hard at giving the appearance of being in charge. To the point of becoming completely nonsensical. Can you imagine Herms on the stand? Only in my wildest dreams. He is well aware of his flaws, but won’t admit them here. He confides in others.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Vector or raster is in the eye of the beholder. You Obots are hopelessly behind. Totally not even in the BallPark.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Bob: I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that you don’t like Obama’s politics AND he’s a usurper-who-forged-his-birth-certificate.

Now, how do we know he’s actually talking about Obama? Have you noticed that under all his noms de plume, he has never referred to his object of fixation by name — not even by a cutesy mangling of his name?

“Tepper”/”Shlepper”, sure, and it’s clear he hateses him and his tricksy ways. But never has he said any variation of Obama’s name.

Hermitian: Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

But you got nothing !

Well, we’ve got a two-term president (hey, as do you! Funny thing, that Constitution!).

And what he‘s got is certifications–more than you can count, it would appear–from the canonical certifying authority of record. Which is more than any president or presidential candidate before him has ever had. Or been asked for, fancy that.

You, on the other hand, appear to have a complete lack of support from Congress, the federal judicial branch, any state judiciary, any intelligence agency, any domestic or foreign press of note, any foreign government that would loooove to pop up with damaging information about your and our president, and a complete lack of any positive notice of your activity from any of the president’s actual election opponents, or the RNC.

You’ve got: Orly Taitz. Donald Trump. And a used car salesman with a pornstache and two scammed trips to Hawaii under his belt.

And you’ve got a fixation on the letter “H” and an inability to use a computer function designed for complete n00bs, as you try to convince us that your grasp of technology is far beyond our puny reckoning.

I would say we have the better end of the deal, here, but I welcome your rebuttal.

I could only read some of that thread without my brain exploding, but I was particularly amused by his claim that Douglas Vogt filed a “criminal complaint” against Obama and various Hawaii officials in 2011. “We do not know whether or not a criminal investigation is in progress,” said Hermy/Henry.

I don’t think Hermitian and Y-D-I/Ignore/Nutcase/etc. (which is who Bob and then I was referring to) are the same person. Hermitian may have his own set of problems, but he doesn’t seem to have any particular phobia concerning Obama’s name.

“Hermitian: Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

“But you got nothing !

“Well, we’ve got a two-term president (hey, as do you! Funny thing, that Constitution!).

“And what he‘s got is certifications–more than you can count, it would appear–from the canonical certifying authority of record. Which is more than any president or presidential candidate before him has ever had. Or been asked for, fancy that.

“You, on the other hand, appear to have a complete lack of support from Congress, the federal judicial branch, any state judiciary, any intelligence agency, any domestic or foreign press of note, any foreign government that would loooove to pop up with damaging information about your and our president, and a complete lack of any positive notice of your activity from any of the president’s actual election opponents, or the RNC.

“You’ve got: Orly Taitz. Donald Trump. And a used car salesman with a pornstache and two scammed trips to Hawaii under his belt.

“And you’ve got a fixation on the letter “H” and an inability to use a computer function designed for complete n00bs, as you try to convince us that your grasp of technology is far beyond our puny reckoning.

“I would say we have the better end of the deal, here, but I welcome your rebuttal.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I have the truth on my side you have a lie on yours.

I am treating Hermi’s posts like I do Mario’s. I skip through them with only a nanosecond glance. Since he makes it cumbersome to determine what he quotes and what he says, I rarely waste my time to figure it out. The downside is the swipe cramp I get from going through comments quickly on Google Reader for Android.

“”HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
That’s because you wanted me to zoom in on page 1. When you finally get around to page 4 wake me up.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“That’s because even even page one will demonstrate that it’s a scan. Page 4 would suffice, too, but you’re too afraid to admit you’re wrong. It must be sad to be so shattered by us obots. I feel sorry for you, Henry.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Oh no! Not that old “the scanner made me do it defense again!
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Same here. My take, such as it is, is he does it on purpose and that the more people complain the more glee he takes in it. But why bother overly parsing nonsense? If he cannot make himself clear, his comments doubly deserve their unavoidable fate of irrelevance. It’s not like he actually has a point to make, after all. The value of this kind of parsing is all about learning other stuff, stuff that as interesting as it is has no bearing on the central issue. So, if he makes it difficult, who cares? I know we can all get caught up, and some are simply exercising their ire, but really his posts are basically tedious irrelevancies.

Northland10: Since he makes it cumbersome to determine what he quotes and what he says, I rarely waste my time to figure it out.

“Hermitian: You lazy Obots have zero credibility because you are all talk and no show.

“Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

“But you got nothing !

“And the METADATA of the WH LFCOLB image file was scrubbed.

“So what do you say to the judge when he asks why you only did this magic trick once?

“And then you turned around and created a new different LFCOLB PDF image without using the same magic trick.

“We would have to have the certified copies provided by Hawaii to get the same nine layers. And the same scanner. And the same computer and program used for PDF conversion. Being such a marvel of Engineering, Henry, why don’t you tell us all what the equipment was?

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Engineers are great improvisers. There are many .JPEG copies of the Green backgound Obama LFCOLB on the internet. Of course the CCP investigators used a color laser printed copy WH LFCOLB as a control for all their trials. That is the standard for the scientific method. So you Obots are at least a year behind law enforcement in providing proof of your MRC scanned hypothesis. The forensic experts working with Zullo have completed over 1200 trials far more than the Obots could do in the time remaining. Think about it. Of course it goes without saying — put up or shut up.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“Oh, you don’t know exactly what it was either…hmmm…

“You, being an engineer, Mr. Blake, must know that we couldn’t get the EXACT result from something that is different. No “reconstruction” is going to be exactly the same. While it would be “close enough” for us humans, a computer algorithm will treat it differently because it is different.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
If you started now and worked 24/7 you would never come up with half the hard evidence that we have gathered.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“Hermitian:
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
That’s because you wanted me to zoom in on page 1.When you finally get around to page 4 wake me up.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“That’s because even even page one will demonstrate that it’s a scan. Page 4 would suffice, too, but you’re too afraid to admit you’re wrong. It must be sad to be so shattered by us obots. I feel sorry for you, Henry.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
There you go again swallowing ever lie uttered by Mr. C. Please post where I ever said that the four-page Tepper document 35-1 was not scanned.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“Hermitian: Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

“But you got nothing !

“Well, we’ve got a two-term president (hey, as do you! Funny thing, that Constitution!).

“And what he‘s got is certifications–more than you can count, it would appear–from the canonical certifying authority of record. Which is more than any president or presidential candidate before him has ever had. Or been asked for, fancy that.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Wrong! I was subjected to a full background check by two FBI agents in my application for a security clearance. Obama has never had a background check as President.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“Why should anyone have to do your song and dance Henry when you claimed for months on amazon you had absolute proof that the long form was either delayed, late or altered and when asked to present proof you never did. You instead tried to claim the proper people have already been shown this “proof”. You’re a has been.”

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Some evidence is so obvious that it cannot be shared with the opposition.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Oh no! Not that old “the scanner made me do it defense again!
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Which is funny – because you were too silly to realize it was even scanned! “Oh no! It’s different,” says [Personal information deleted, Doc]. “Well, of course it is – it’s a scan,” said the rest of the world.

Paper:
Same here.My take, such as it is, is he does it on purpose and that the more people complain the more glee he takes in it.But why bother overly parsing nonsense?If he cannot make himself clear, his comments doubly deserve their unavoidable fate of irrelevance.It’s not like he actually has a point to make, after all.The value of this kind of parsing is all about learning other stuff, stuff that as interesting as it is has no bearing on the central issue.So, if he makes it difficult, who cares?I know we can all get caught up, and some are simply exercising their ire, but really his posts are basically tedious irrelevancies.

Herm,
As someone who has written raster to vector conversion programs, I really have to laugh at your “eye of the beholder” comment.
You can’t even grasp the usage of the quote function on this blog, so why do you think you know more than Xerox, HP, etc?
Can you even write a reply without the letter H?

“For them the world is highly ordered and messy things are the manifestations of the conspiracy behind it

“I would’ve put “simple/complicated” instead of “ordered/messy”, but you have a point there by highlighting a different aspect of conspiracy thinking.

“For conspiracy believers, the world is simple, thus any process must be simple as well, and being ordered is one symptom of that. As in “a stamp applied by an official always looks the same and cannot be smeared or uneven etc.”.

“However, for birthers, that is not the core of their belief but simply the lenghts they will go to to defend their ODS. As in “the stamp is aligned perfectly, that’s impossible, FORGERY” and “the stamp is smeared, that’s impossible, FORGERY”. I don’t think most of them have ever applied such standards to other scenarios.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Mathematicians and Scientists discovered and developed Chaos theory. Not all of them were Obots.

“Hermitian: Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

“But you got nothing !

“Well, we’ve got a two-term president (hey, as do you! Funny thing, that Constitution!).

“And what he‘s got is certifications–more than you can count, it would appear–from the canonical certifying authority of record. Which is more than any president or presidential candidate before him has ever had. Or been asked for, fancy that.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Wrong! I was subjected to a full background check by two FBI agents in my application for a security clearance.Obama has never had a background check as President.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

“Hermitian: Maybe if you had created even one reconstructed PDF image file containing the same nine layers as the WH LFCOLB.

“But you got nothing !

“Well, we’ve got a two-term president (hey, as do you! Funny thing, that Constitution!).

“And what he‘s got is certifications–more than you can count, it would appear–from the canonical certifying authority of record. Which is more than any president or presidential candidate before him has ever had. Or been asked for, fancy that.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Wrong! I was subjected to a full background check by two FBI agents in my application for a security clearance.Obama has never had a background check as President.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

1. I have started deleting Hermitian’s comments that are nothing but insults or smart-ass comments, and have no argument. The other ones are approved. I’m also deleting comments by others of the same character.

2. I have deleted comments by others that violate the blog’s personal information prohibition, and added some words to the auto-moderation list.

Some folks have suggested that I ban Hermitian. I understand that; however, when I was over at ORYR people suggested banning me. I’m reluctant to ban anyone. In Hermitian’s case, he’s posting so many messages that are inciting a flood of answers, that the discussion has broken down and as a result no one is actually discussing anything.

So, I’ll limit Hermitian to substantive remarks, and the rest of you can learn that you don’t have to answer something you don’t like.

First, we note that Scott Tepper is somewhat of an expert on birthers.

So amazing fact #1 according to Hermitian is that Tepper, knowing that the birthers have specific theories about the LFBC, posts a copy of the PDF on the Court Docket (document 15-1) that faithfully reproduces all of the artifacts that that the birthers think are marks of forgery. That is, Tepper knowingly submitted evidence to the court that birthers consider proof of forgery.

Amazing fact #2 according to Hermitian is that Tepper then submitted a second copy of the birth certificate, which visually appears to be a poor copy of the birth certificate scanned with other correspondence and somehow expects the Judge to use a detailed internal structural analysis of the second document (which visually appears to be at least 1 generation removed from anything from the White House) and because of that not do the same detailed analysis of the document which actually came from the White House.

If anybody can explain either of these crazy ideas to me, please do.

I don’t know which is crazier, expecting anybody in the court to look at PDF internals of anything in the first place, or expecting anybody to look at a 2nd generation copy when the original is available.

Nevertheless, I see crazy scenarios like this all over birtherism. This goes to support what Shermer said, that conspiracy theorists have brain anomalies that prevent them from distinguishing between plausible and utter nonsense, or put another way, they mistakenly recognize patterns in random noise.

Hermitian: Some evidence is so obvious that it cannot be shared with the opposition.

I vote not to ban Hermie. He is a lot of fun. He displays the same completely unjustified air of authority that Irey and Vogt display. They make complete fools of themselves every time they write something.

Doc, I don’t want to quibble with you about Hermy’s name, but I will point out he has quoted a document (referring to it as “my affidavit”) which contains his name.

That being said, I love hearing their arguments. It better prepares me for figuring out the thought processes of the middle and high school students I teach. Hopefully, I can use these experiences to show them the flaws in their logic.

Hermitian: There are many .JPEG copies of the Green backgound Obama LFCOLB on the internet. Of course the CCP investigators used a color laser printed copy WH LFCOLB as a control for all their trials. That is the standard for the scientific method.

LOL! Using the output as a stand-in for the input? That’s anything but scientific. Even worse, you allege they further altered the output by re-interpolating it yet again by printing it. As I have speculated here, they engaged in a self-fulfilling prophecy rather than a forensic process.

Oh, yes, you did. You babbled about it all through July, accused Doc of changing his story, etc, etc. All in the same thread linked to above.

Hermitian: No just a very experienced and educated Engineer who has worked with your kind for many years.

It sounds like you want to call me a “dirty hippie” or some such. Did you call your coworkers ‘dumski’, ‘doofus’, and ‘dolt’?

Hermitian: Now that you have Mr. C’s really clear “reconstruction” of the Obama LFCOLB (already a JPEG) why don’t you print out a copy on your Toshiba multifunction and then do your magic PDF compression. And then post the PDF image file on this blog.

Well, I could give an ungrateful man a fish, knowing full well he’ll spit it out, or give him some hints on fishing, just in case he decides to admit he’s hungry. Had I not investigated thoroughly, I wouldn’t be so certain. Spreading untruth is evil. You suggest I try to reproduce the results generated by one input suggested to a specific process … using a completely different input? LOL!

Sorry, Herms, no cookies for the mice. Literally not worth any special effort. And again, you fail to appreciate this is an observation. Rational people are discussing an amusing issue as a distraction. Sometimes it’s even educational. Loons popping up to share their delusions are the gravy. And you’re very generous. 🙂

Hermitian: Some evidence is so obvious that it cannot be shared with the opposition.

The smoking gun is in plain sight … to those blessed with CT-ray vision?
I sure hope it’s better than the Blake “two copies of the same image means forgery” affidavit!
I must admit that was hidden in plain sight.

Hermitian: And no MRC scanner would ever add two layers that contain only random clusters of pure White pixels.

I love that you continue to obsess over those ‘white dots’! Those near-white layers are absolutely consistent with the rest of the image. The image was processed using edge detection. Small clusters of near-white will be selected just as any other area of consistent color would (you assume for some reason all text is expected to be dark on a light background?)

The best part is … one of those groups of ‘white dots’ are the highlights on the raised points of something you insist isn’t even there.

You seem to prefer second tier software. Have you ever tried (a href=”http://www.nuance.com”>Nuance? PDF Converter 8 is quite good (WND advertises it!), and only costs a fraction of what Acrobat does. Less artsy-fartsy too, so an engineer, even a dated one like yourself, should love it. Best of all, it’s literally filthy with MRC. Right there under ‘save as’ … save as PDF with MRC Compression. Even better, after you install it, you can compress any PDF-able file, emplying MRC, simply by right-clicking and selecting that option. Go sign up for a demo of the ‘Enterprise’ version at nuance.com and have some fun.

Again, as an engineer, you should understand the difference between an idea (like a process outline), and its reality (an implementation). There are many, many flavors of MRC, and refinements are constantly being made. The compression offered on Xerox’s machines as of a few years ago is really hamhanded. For instance, Nuance’s version doesn’t make halos. It follows the same process, but ‘heals’ the background, like using the healing brush in Photoshop. Blurry, but less distracting. Here, look this paper over, it includes several comparisons of results produced by various MRC implementations when fed the same image:

You should notice that MRC has moved on. These examples are starting to resemble color separations, and are achieving 99.7% compression while maintaining sharp images. Neato.

Reality Check: He is a lot of fun. He displays the same completely unjustified air of authority that Irey and Vogt display.

I completely agree! Not only is he entertaining, he unwittingly brings a fresh perspective and new information. Although he interprets them wrongly, he highlights connections no one else would make (overactive pattern recognition….). Like autistic savants, trapped in their own minds, generating bizarre assessments. As Doc would say, you can learn something from the birthers. They won’t ever acknowledge the true nature of their insight … but if that requires coming out of the shell, they wouldn’t pay off anymore. They’d be just another rational being.

Irey and Herms are definitely peas in a pod. I bet they get along famously; but if they ever disagree, they’ll be at each other’s throats! They once had authority, but the world has passed them by (the outdated technical references they make are breathtaking!), and they both refuse to acknowledge it. This is common in older men. My father has a touch of it. I hope and pray to never become a cranky old ex-expert coot.

A principle in birtherism holding that increasing the accuracy of measurement of one delusional, unqualified and self appointed expert increases the uncertainty with which another equally unqualified, delusional expert’s irrelevant testimony may be known.

Hey, if you look long enough at the green security pattern the way you look at those 3D images where you have to stare “beyond the screen”, it clearly shows a 3D text saying “FORGED BY MIKE, UP YOURS CORSI”. *lol*

Hermitian: Wrong! I was subjected to a full background check by two FBI agents in my application for a security clearance. Obama has never had a background check as President.

The only recent President who would ever have had a background check was HW Bush (when he headed the CIA). Democratic natons do not give police agencies, which is what the FBI is, a veto over whom the people may select to lead them. Nations that do are called police states.

Hermitian: “Wrong! I was subjected to a full background check by two FBI agents in my application for a security clearance. Obama has never had a background check as President.”

Let me hazard a slight guess here…Obama has had his background checked for over 5 years by Democrats(Hillary), Republicans(McClain, Romney, Trump, Taitz, etc, etc, etc) and independents…like yourself Hermie. These combined entities have spent probably close to a billion dollars, been to court over 200 times, and lost every time in the court of law and the court of public opinion. I would bet everything I own that the President’s background check has been more thorough than anything that you went through…by a huge long shot. Now, through all this, the ONLY thing that has come out is that the birthers say Hawaii is lying because they say so. That’s it. All the other so-called evidence is opinions by people whose opinion isn’t even worth the effort to read their opinions…again, like you Hermie.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
There you go again swallowing ever lie uttered by Mr. C.Please post where I ever said that the four-page Tepper document 35-1 was not scanned.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

You don’t have to say it wasn’t scanned. You are trying to compare a scan of an original document (the LFBC) with a scan of a printout of a scan of a document.

Why is an engineer abusing Heisenberg? Are we comparing documents and computer files to elementary particles now?

Heisenberg’s principle is a very specific application of the observer effect. Anyone thinking along those lines will soon be completely adrift in nihilism, like ‘we can know nothing’ troll Jack Obsborne.

aesthetocyst: Why is an engineer abusing Heisenberg? Are we comparing documents and computer files to elementary particles now?

Heisenberg’s principle is a very specific application of the observer effect. Anyone thinking along those lines will soon be completely adrift in nihilism, like ‘we can know nothing’ troll Jack Obsborne.

LOL! Using the output as a stand-in for the input? That’s anything but scientific. Even worse, you allege they further altered the output by re-interpolating it yet again by printing it. As I have speculated here, they engaged in a self-fulfilling prophecy rather than a forensic process.

Where have I read this before? Lets see…Tepper took the page 8 LFCOLB (= to WH LFCOLB + Blue Case Label) PDF image and printed it out. Then he used a Fugitsu ScanSnap S1500 scanner (without MRC?) to scan this printed copy to another PDF file. Then he applied a light green color (probably in Photoshop) to the entire page just to turn the 15-1 Document Case label from blue to green and then he typed another Blue Case Label for Document 35-1 over the Green 15-1 Case Label at the top edge of the page.

Did I get that about right?

I suppose that you expected the CCP investigators to just twiddle their thumbs like all the Obots until Hell freezes over and Fuddy finally releases that half typed, half hand written Obama birth record?

Oh, yes, you did. You babbled about it all through July, accused Doc of changing his story, etc, etc. All in the same thread linked to above.

Babbled about what? And what story of Mr. C’s ? If you are talking about the coding manual Mr. C just posted that he changed his story.

It sounds like you want to call me a “dirty hippie” or some such. Did you call your coworkers ‘dumski’, ‘doofus’, and ‘dolt’?

No! My coworkers were not Obots.

Well, I could give an ungrateful man a fish, knowing full well he’ll spit it out, or give him some hints on fishing, just in case he decides to admit he’s hungry. Had I not investigated thoroughly, I wouldn’t be so certain. Spreading untruth is evil. You suggest I try to reproduce the results generated by one input suggested to a specific process … using a completely different input? LOL!

You mean like that printed copy of page 8?

Sorry, Herms, no cookies for the mice. Literally not worth any special effort. And again, you fail to appreciate this is an observation. Rational people are discussing an amusing issue as a distraction. Sometimes it’s even educational. Loons popping up to share their delusions are the gravy. And you’re very generous.

The smoking gun is in plain sight … to those blessed with CT-ray vision?
I sure hope it’s better than the Blake “two copies of the same image means forgery” affidavit!

As I was saying all Obots are blind as bats.

I must admit that was hidden in plain sight.

I love that you continue to obsess over those ‘white dots’! Those near-white layers are absolutely consistent with the rest of the image. The image was processed using edge detection. Small clusters of near-white will be selected just as any other area of consistent color would (you assume for some reason all text is expected to be dark on a light background?)

What are you talking about? The White spots are all the same monochrome near-White color. Because these two disjoint objects are 1 Bit monochrome, the color of the White spots is the same as the color of the transparent regions within each of the two layers. The near-White color for both layers are the same K = 3.5%. There are no text characters within either White Spot layer.

Try to be coherent Doofus!

The best part is … one of those groups of ‘white dots’ are the highlights on the raised points of something you insist isn’t even there.

This sentence makes no sense at all. Are you hitting the sauce again?

You seem to prefer second tier software. Have you ever tried (a href=”http://www.nuance.com”>Nuance? PDF Converter 8 is quite good (WND advertises it!), and only costs a fraction of what Acrobat does. Less artsy-fartsy too, so an engineer, even a dated one like yourself, should love it. Best of all, it’s literally filthy with MRC. Right there under ‘save as’ … save as PDF with MRC Compression. Even better, after you install it, you can compress any PDF-able file, emplying MRC, simply by right-clicking and selecting that option. Go sign up for a demo of the ‘Enterprise’ version at nuance.com and have some fun.

I don’t have any use for MRC. I have a big hard drive with plenty of free space. MRC is for sissys.

Again, as an engineer, you should understand the difference between an idea (like a process outline), and its reality (an implementation). There are many, many flavors of MRC, and refinements are constantly being made. The compression offered on Xerox’s machines as of a few years ago is really hamhanded. For instance, Nuance’s version doesn’t make halos. It follows the same process, but ‘heals’ the background, like using the healing brush in Photoshop.Blurry, but less distracting. Here, look this paper over, it includes several comparisons of results produced by various MRC implementations when fed the same image:

So obviously you’re in love with this MRC stuff. Ho Hum. Wonder why the forger didn’t use it for his latest Obama LFCOLB?

You should notice that MRC has moved on. These examples are starting to resemble color separations, and are achieving 99.7% compression while maintaining sharp images. Neato.

I completely agree! Not only is he entertaining, he unwittingly brings a fresh perspective and new information. Although he interprets them wrongly, he highlights connections no one else would make (overactive pattern recognition….). Like autistic savants, trapped in their own minds, generating bizarre assessments. As Doc would say, you can learn something from the birthers. They won’t ever acknowledge the true nature of their insight … but if that requires coming out of the shell, they wouldn’t pay off anymore. They’d be just another rational being.

You Obots are a bunch of lightweights.

Irey and Herms are definitely peas in a pod. I bet they get along famously; but if they ever disagree, they’ll be at each other’s throats! They once had authority, but the world has passed them by (the outdated technical references they make are breathtaking!), and they both refuse to acknowledge it. This is common in older men. My father has a touch of it. I hope and pray to never become a cranky old ex-expert coot.

And then there’s Obama your God. What can I say except nothing works under Obama. He’s all about seeding chaos to jump the next shark. This week it’s gun control. Wonder if this shark is the inauguration? Wonder who is going to swear him in? Maybe Joe Biden? Sheriff Arpaio? Mike Zullo ? We will hear more on the 15th.

Where have I read this before? Lets see…Tepper took the page 8 LFCOLB (= to WH LFCOLB + Blue Case Label) PDF image and printed it out. Then he used a Fugitsu ScanSnap S1500 scanner (without MRC?) to scan this printed copy to another PDF file. Then he applied a light green color (probably in Photoshop) to the entire page just to turn the 15-1 Document Case label from blue to green and then he typed another Blue Case Label for Document 35-1 over the Green 15-1 Case Label at the top edge of the page.

Did I get that about right?

Nope. Tepper took the second page of document 15-1 (apparently someone [Jack Ryan?] downloaded it from PACER and combined it with document 15) and printed it out, using either the “Fit” or “Shrink Oversized Pages” setting. This caused it to print at ~96%, which is why the “green” case label is smaller and lower on the page than the “blue” case label. When printing a color document, the colors tend to fade (particularly on an inkjet printer) compared to what’s on the screen. The document was then photocopied prior to being sent to Fuddy (I say this because the four-page 35-1 document wasn’t scanned until June 4th). This would alter the colors even more, as well as blending the colors at the edges of objects, reducing the halos. When the answer arrived, the photocopy was then scanned in. This would again alter the colors and blend the edges of objects. Afters scanning, the four-page 35-1 document was uploaded to PACER, at which point the “blue” case label was automatically added.

No need for Photoshop or green filters. Just the normal consequences of printing, copying, and scanning.

W. Kevin Vicklund: No need for Photoshop or green filters. Just the normal consequences of printing, copying, and scanning.

Exactly; easy enough to scan a full page, but impossible to print a full bleed on typical office equipment. And of course the colorshifted. If the color was perfect, that would be highly suspect. Color correction, proofing … that’s service bureau work. These pages are legal correspondence, not proofs for print production!

The Magic M: I would’ve put “simple/complicated” instead of “ordered/messy”, but you have a point there by highlighting a different aspect of conspiracy thinking.

For conspiracy believers, the world is simple, thus any process must be simple as well, and being ordered is one symptom of that. As in “a stamp applied by an official always looks the same and cannot be smeared or uneven etc.”.

I see birthers in the exact opposite light. Everything is needlessly and endlessly complicated. There is subterfuge behind every shrub, and no one is what they seem to be.

An example: to a rational person, the Supreme Court refuses to take the birther’s case because the law is settled and there is nothing to be gained by doing so. That’s what I think. It makes sense.

To birthers, the current theory seems to be that Justices Kagan and Sotomayor are plants of the Obama Administration, unable or unwilling to do anything he would disapprove of. They are either philosophically aligned with the President, or he has something on them, making them his puppets.

Birthers seem truly stumped by Justice Thomas, who they otherwise like, but who has refused so far to join their quest.

Chief Justice Roberts is a birther fantasy unto himself. In just the last week, I have seen the birthers spinning wild tales about Justice Roberts that include the “fact” that he’s gay; that he’s been threatened with bodily harm unless he votes the way President Obama wants him to; that his children will be taken away due to some sort of impropriety (they were adopted, illegally according to birthers); that his children will be killed; that he has been bought off; that he is ill; and/or that he is under the influence of drugs.

MN-Skeptic: Inexplicably, the Mobile Theme option will get switched to ON and then it seems that you have no control over the size of the text. You can’t pinch/enlarge, whatever. Today my Google Nexus 7″ tablet got stuck that way. I keep telling it to switch the Mobile Theme OFF, but it doesn’t obey. So I’m stuck with however WordPress wants to display things. I’ve had that problem with my iPod Touch in the past, then suddenly it will decide to turn off the Mobile Theme. I don’t follow the rhyme or reason. It just happens.

Try “request desktop site”, which is on the same menu as refresh/forward/bookmarks/share/find. When I use that function on my Nexus 7, it seems to persist for a few days (varies), then I have to re-request it.

Apple Preview is automatically triggered when you open a mail attachment on a Mac.

Apple Preview automatically creates a new PDF image when it opens a PDF file.

The reason the WH did this is it is the default and expected behavior of the workflow. They would have had to have done unusual things for this not to happen.

“State-of-the-art Xerox machine” means “the kind of Xerox machine a decently run office would be expected to lease.” You make it sound like “Spooky Mission: Impossible forgery machine.”Why?

I think it might be possible for the “Properties” to indicate the multi-function center machine name itself if it’s one that automatically emails a scan produced as a PDF. However, if one brought up Preview to perform the scan, the program itself will typically be identified.

And of course I’ve renamed files pulled up via Preview, including encrypting the PDF (Adobe requires an expensive version).

y_p_w: I think it might be possible for the “Properties” to indicate the multi-function center machine name itself if it’s one that automatically emails a scan produced as a PDF.

Such files do list the device as creator tool. But if resaved from Preview, as opposed to simply open for review then closed, the newly saved file is from Preview, and lists its creator tool as Preview.

aesthetocyst: Such files do list the device as creator tool. But if resaved from Preview, as opposed to simply open for review then closed, the newly saved file is from Preview, and lists its creator tool as Preview.

Right — that’s part of what I meant to indicate when I said that Preview “automatically creates a new PDF image.”

When Preview opens a PDF file, it reads in all the file’s objects and formatting specs and holds them internally in the format it prefers to work with. (Technically, it’s the Quartz rendering library that does this.)

If you ask it to save the file, it then writes out all the objects again, along with a fresh set of metadata (or METADATA, as someone here is fond of shouting).

Note that the contents are really not changed — images are the same images, their positions are in the same position, colors are the same colors, text (if there is any) is the same text — but inconsequential things like the internal names and numbers assigned to the images now are all Quartz-y.

Presumably, the Apple engineers did this because they figured… it didn’t matter. The content is what’s important, not how it’s internally formatted. (Sound familiar, H-man?)

Or, it could be because Apple is in the tank for Obama. Remember, Al Gore’s on their board! This could be the key evidence you need!

justlw: Presumably, the Apple engineers did this because they figured… it didn’t matter.

Err … it’s nothing any engineers did, not limited to Apple, it just the way the computing world works. Attempt to open any file in any application. If it’s a valid file, of a type the application supports, the file will open, and should reflect what the creator intended. Checking the file’s properties from within that application will report how and when it was created. Saving from that application creates a new file, with a new creation story, with the same contents … with some potential differences in structure, but from a human perspective, the same contents.

Open a PDF scanned on a Xerox device in Illustrator and resave it. It will now say it’s an Illustrator file, same contents, different markup. Open the same in Word, you’ll get gobbledygook, as Word can’t render PDFs, resave the gobbledygook as a PDF, you now have a Word PDF … of gobbledygook.

I have not seen an application that preserves multiple generations of file history (there may well be, haven’t really been looking). PDF forms save a history of who made what changes to the form … not quite the same thing. A true file history would be cool, but to what end? Files floating around the internet would build up reeeeally long rap sheets!

aesthetocyst: It’s… nothing any engineers did, not limited to Apple, it just the way the computing world works.

Oops. Excellent point. I was thinking that there are situations where the new file’s contents would be the same as the original, but yeah, those are really just degenerate cases where the format is simple enough that this will (practically) always be true: a text file, or a bitmap, or possibly even a GIF. The app is still writing it out as if it were new.

Generally speaking, and this is what I had in my head, it would take a conscious engineering effort to preserve the identical bits of the original file (especially in cases like a pipe where the “original” file never existed other than in ephemeral form). But trying to preserve the original format would slow things down in various ways, and would be of extremely little benefit, at least to sane people.

aesthetocyst: I have not seen an application that preserves multiple generations of file history

It’s much easier to push that functionality down to the file system–VMS had that capability way back in the ’80s, and some modern file systems do so today–or let the user deal with it.

ZixiOfIx: Try “request desktop site”, which is on the same menu as refresh/forward/bookmarks/share/find. When I use that function on my Nexus 7, it seems to persist for a few days (varies), then I have to re-request it.

My Android is stuck in desktop mode. It was on the Mobile theme for a week or so a couple of months ago, but it disappeared and I can’t get it back.

Keith: My Android is stuck in desktop mode. It was on the Mobile theme for a week or so a couple of months ago, but it disappeared and I can’t get it back.

I have always had issues with the standard Android browser accepting WordPress switch between mobile and desktop. Since I upgraded to Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0), it formats Desktop to fit the screen (pushing the right column to the bottom of the post/comments column) so I have been fine with that (and you can’t quote in mobile mode). If you have 4.0 or higher, you could probably download Chrome for Android which appears to not have the issue.

justlw: It’s much easier to push that functionality down to the file system–VMS had that capability way back in the ’80s, and some modern file systems do so today–or let the user deal with it.

One of the few redeeming qualities of SharePoint is the ability to turn on Version control. Since it is a business product meant for sharing, version history is extremely useful (if the administrator or creator of the list remembers to turn it on).

Northland10: I have always had issues with the standard Android browser accepting WordPress switch between mobile and desktop.Since I upgraded to Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0), it formats Desktop to fit the screen (pushing the right column to the bottom of the post/comments column) so I have been fine with that (and you can’t quote in mobile mode).If you have 4.0 or higher, you could probably download Chrome for Android which appears to not have the issue.

Maybe. I’m not a great fan of Chrome on the desktop. I would have thought the default Android browser would be Chrome for Android anyway. Why wouldn’t Google eat its own cooking?

justlw: It’s much easier to push that functionality down to the file system

Yea, verily. But, unless I am suffering from a limited imagination, that only works in a closed file system … a single workstation, or within the confines of a defined network sharing a common file system. When talking about any opened system, or a network of networks, the file history would have to travel with the file itself. That quickly goes to crazy places. Like multiple copies of the same file, each with their own history, like dollar bills traced on “Where’s George”!

I wasn’t either until I found out the hard way that’s it very backward compatible compared to other browsers. My main system was stolen (grrrr), I had to haul out an old WinXP deck. Chrome was suddenly my best friend.

ZixiOfIx: I see birthers in the exact opposite light. Everything is needlessly and endlessly complicated. There is subterfuge behind every shrub, and no one is what they seem to be.

Welcome

Obama Conspiracy Theories since 2008 has been your des­tination for conspiracy theories and fringe views about Barack Obama. Having an argu­ment with your buddies at the office? You're in the right place. Use the Search box below or check out our featured articles. If you don't agree with what you see, feel free to add your thoughts to the over 250,000 comments others have left. To leave a comment not on the current articles, visit the Open Thread.

Quote of the day

Conspiracies

Conspiracies

Sometimes people leave comments designed to offend or outrage the reader, and invoke a firestorm of protest in response. These are the Internet trolls. Replying to them is feeding them and they will come back for more. Refusing to play their game encourages them to go away.